As fact checkers busily highlight the myriad number of lies and distortions offered by Mitt-Etch-A-Sketch-Romney during last night's debate, and the spinners spin their polls with impunity, I find it interesting that the debate tactic itself has not yet been discussed nor properly analyzed. In fact, the lies and distortions offered by Romney in last night's debate are the very ESSENCE of his tactic -- and is therefore quite pertinent to the discussion. Romney used a debate tactic known as the Gish Gallop.

The Urban Dictionary defines the Gish Gallop thusly:

Named for the debate tactic created by creationist shill Duane Gish, a Gish Gallop involves spewing so much bullshit in such a short span on that your opponent canít address let alone counter all of it. To make matters worse a Gish Gallop will often have one or more 'talking points' that has a tiny core of truth to it, making the person rebutting it spend even more time debunking it in order to explain that, yes, it's not totally false but the Galloper is distorting/misusing/misstating the actual situation. A true Gish Gallop generally has two traits.

1) The factual and logical content of the Gish Gallop is pure bullshit and anybody knowledgeable and informed on the subject would recognize it as such almost instantly. That is, the Gish Gallop is designed to appeal to and deceive precisely those sorts of people who are most in need of honest factual education.

2) The points are all ones that the Galloper either knows, or damn well should know, are totally bullshit. With the slimier users of the Gish Gallop, like Gish himself, its a near certainty that the points are chosen not just because the Galloper knows that they're bullshit, but because the Galloper is deliberately trying to shovel as much bullshit into as small a space as possible in order to overwhelm his opponent with sheer volume and bamboozle any audience members with a facade of scholarly acumen and factual knowledge.

................................................SN IP"

Quote:

LiberalFighter (29,264 posts)

3. In order for Rmoney to have won with that ploy

wouldn't Obama needed to spend time rebutting the bullshit?

Quote:

progressivebydesign (18,074 posts)

5. and he TRIED to rebut but there was just too much to address.. nt

Right LOL.

Quote:

progressivebydesign (18,074 posts)

4. thx! I was trying to articulate this last night.. there was just NO way to stop the tide of lies

I swear to God they had Romney on some medications, like speed. He was LEANING in with that crazy smile, and wild eyes, and just didn't stop to take a breath. Can you imagine him with world leaders?? I mean, other ones, not just the ones he pissed off this summer.

Waaaaaa..........Romney gave so much information that Obama (and we at DU) couldn't understand it and couldn't address all of it. Waaaaaaa.